.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Unlike other jewellery traditions which rely on the interplay between precious metal and inlaid stones, much of the Fatimid jewellery which survives today is constructed entirely of gold. The decoration instead is based on the realisation of complex scrolling motifs in filigree, executed using a distinctive technique. Goldsmiths would begin with a single gold wire, which they would twist into a rope and fold back on itself. The resulting paired cord could be manipulated into curving arabesques, and the effect completed with the addition of gold granulation in the valley between the two wires (for a fuller discussion of Fatimid jewellery making techniques, see Jack Ogden and Michael Spink, The Art of Adornment, Oxford, 2013, pp.124-9).
Much of our knowledge of the dating of Fatimid jewellery comes from the archaeological evidence, in particular a number of gold caches excavated in Tunisia and Israel. Filigree earrings have come to light in small containers, stored alongside Fatimid coins. These coins allow scholars to be confident in the attribution of jewellery of this type to Fatimid workshops, and in some cases allow a hoard to be more precisely dated. For instance, in the mid-20th century an assemblage was discovered in Tunisia which contained some 82 coins dated to the first half of the 11th century, of which the latest had been struck in AH 436 / 1044-5 AD (M. Jenkins and M. Keene, Islamic Jewelry in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1982, p.80). A few decades later came the discovery of two further hoards found in Tiberias, which are both in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Coins in those hoards gave each a terminus postquem of AH 455 / 1063-4 AD (acc.no.1990-1269-1275) and AH 426 / 1034-5 AD (acc.no.1974-2138 et al.). Assuming that the hoards were hidden soon after the striking of the last-dated coin, it is likely that the jewellery in the hoard dates from roughly the same period, giving confidence in the attribution of earrings like these to the 11th century.
Some scholars believe that the rapid appearance of a homogenous Fatimid jewellery style means that it was an imported tradition. Marilyn Jenkins suggests that the finest examples of Fatimid goldwork, such as a pair of earrings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (acc.no.1979.278.2a,b) were made ‘East of Egypt’, possibly in Syria where the influence of skilled Iraqi jewellers may have been more keenly felt (Keene and Jenkins, op.cit., no.51a, p.85). Ogden and Spink suggest instead an origin to the west, based on stylistic similarities with European – and particularly Spanish – jewellery traditions (op.cit., p.133). Such arguments, though they correctly indicate how deeply enmeshed the Fatimid caliphate was with its neighbours both east and west, de-emphasise the indigenous Egyptian jewellery tradition, with its roots in the Pharaonic period, which continued to develop under the Byzantines.
The particular form of this earring is typical of the period, with a crescent shape and box construction. The elements would have been assembled separately and then meticulously pieced together and soldered. The plain sheet border and threading loops around the edges of the present example resemble those on a well-preserved pair of earrings in the Khalili collection (acc.no.JLY1725, Ogden and Spink, op.cit., no.48, p.143). Like this example, that pair also features around the decorative panel on one side domes densely covered in granulation. A supporting bar through the middle of the box added strength to the finely-made structure of the earring. Based on textual references in the Book of Gifts and Rarities, Ogden and Spink suggest that box jewellery may have been filled with fragrant substances like musk or camphor. The quatrefoil opening in the top of this earring may substantiate that, since balm-soaked material could have been inserted or removed through it (Ogden and Spink, op.cit., p.133).
This earring is exceptional in at least two respects. At more than 4cm. across it is larger than other published examples which tend to be approximately 3cm. in width. This added size gives extra space for filigree decoration, which is finer and more extensive than on most other examples. There is a pair in the LA Mayer Memorial Institute for Islamic Art, Jerusalem which is similar, but at 3.5cm. wide they are not as impressive (Rachel Hasson, Early Islamic Jewellery, Jerusalem, 1987, nos.100 and 102, p.79). This level of intricacy is more commonly encountered on other kinds of Fatimid jewellery. Particularly similar are a pair of pins in the Khalili collection. To the reverse of the pins is an inset circular medallion, similar to that which frames the quatrefoil opening on the upper surface of this earring (acc.no.JLY988; Ogden and Spink, op.cit., no.46, p.140). Also similar in terms of fineness of decoration is a finger ring in the Aga Khan Museum, Toronto (acc.no.AKM595). Finally, the surface can be compared to the biconical beads associated with the Fatimid period. One such example was in a hoard contained in a small ceramic jar excavated in Caesarea, which probably dates from the Crusader period and is now in the Israel Museum (acc.no.1960-834-859). For further examples of Fatimid jewellery in this sale, see lots 22 to 27.
Much of our knowledge of the dating of Fatimid jewellery comes from the archaeological evidence, in particular a number of gold caches excavated in Tunisia and Israel. Filigree earrings have come to light in small containers, stored alongside Fatimid coins. These coins allow scholars to be confident in the attribution of jewellery of this type to Fatimid workshops, and in some cases allow a hoard to be more precisely dated. For instance, in the mid-20th century an assemblage was discovered in Tunisia which contained some 82 coins dated to the first half of the 11th century, of which the latest had been struck in AH 436 / 1044-5 AD (M. Jenkins and M. Keene, Islamic Jewelry in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1982, p.80). A few decades later came the discovery of two further hoards found in Tiberias, which are both in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Coins in those hoards gave each a terminus postquem of AH 455 / 1063-4 AD (acc.no.1990-1269-1275) and AH 426 / 1034-5 AD (acc.no.1974-2138 et al.). Assuming that the hoards were hidden soon after the striking of the last-dated coin, it is likely that the jewellery in the hoard dates from roughly the same period, giving confidence in the attribution of earrings like these to the 11th century.
Some scholars believe that the rapid appearance of a homogenous Fatimid jewellery style means that it was an imported tradition. Marilyn Jenkins suggests that the finest examples of Fatimid goldwork, such as a pair of earrings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (acc.no.1979.278.2a,b) were made ‘East of Egypt’, possibly in Syria where the influence of skilled Iraqi jewellers may have been more keenly felt (Keene and Jenkins, op.cit., no.51a, p.85). Ogden and Spink suggest instead an origin to the west, based on stylistic similarities with European – and particularly Spanish – jewellery traditions (op.cit., p.133). Such arguments, though they correctly indicate how deeply enmeshed the Fatimid caliphate was with its neighbours both east and west, de-emphasise the indigenous Egyptian jewellery tradition, with its roots in the Pharaonic period, which continued to develop under the Byzantines.
The particular form of this earring is typical of the period, with a crescent shape and box construction. The elements would have been assembled separately and then meticulously pieced together and soldered. The plain sheet border and threading loops around the edges of the present example resemble those on a well-preserved pair of earrings in the Khalili collection (acc.no.JLY1725, Ogden and Spink, op.cit., no.48, p.143). Like this example, that pair also features around the decorative panel on one side domes densely covered in granulation. A supporting bar through the middle of the box added strength to the finely-made structure of the earring. Based on textual references in the Book of Gifts and Rarities, Ogden and Spink suggest that box jewellery may have been filled with fragrant substances like musk or camphor. The quatrefoil opening in the top of this earring may substantiate that, since balm-soaked material could have been inserted or removed through it (Ogden and Spink, op.cit., p.133).
This earring is exceptional in at least two respects. At more than 4cm. across it is larger than other published examples which tend to be approximately 3cm. in width. This added size gives extra space for filigree decoration, which is finer and more extensive than on most other examples. There is a pair in the LA Mayer Memorial Institute for Islamic Art, Jerusalem which is similar, but at 3.5cm. wide they are not as impressive (Rachel Hasson, Early Islamic Jewellery, Jerusalem, 1987, nos.100 and 102, p.79). This level of intricacy is more commonly encountered on other kinds of Fatimid jewellery. Particularly similar are a pair of pins in the Khalili collection. To the reverse of the pins is an inset circular medallion, similar to that which frames the quatrefoil opening on the upper surface of this earring (acc.no.JLY988; Ogden and Spink, op.cit., no.46, p.140). Also similar in terms of fineness of decoration is a finger ring in the Aga Khan Museum, Toronto (acc.no.AKM595). Finally, the surface can be compared to the biconical beads associated with the Fatimid period. One such example was in a hoard contained in a small ceramic jar excavated in Caesarea, which probably dates from the Crusader period and is now in the Israel Museum (acc.no.1960-834-859). For further examples of Fatimid jewellery in this sale, see lots 22 to 27.